Hello,
what do you think about the following patch?
Is it right?
Thanks,
Stepan
2007-05-04 Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* doc/autoconf.texi (Caching Results): The CACHE-ID variable
in the examples should not use the internal "ac_" prefix.
Index: doc/autoconf.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/autoconf/autoconf/doc/autoconf.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.1150
diff -u -r1.1150 autoconf.texi
--- doc/autoconf.texi 2 May 2007 02:21:23 -0000 1.1150
+++ doc/autoconf.texi 4 May 2007 19:16:09 -0000
@@ -8593,10 +8593,10 @@
@example
@group
AC_DEFUN([AC_SHELL_TRUE],
-[AC_CACHE_CHECK([whether true(1) works], [ac_cv_shell_true_works],
- [ac_cv_shell_true_works=no
- (true) 2>/dev/null && ac_cv_shell_true_works=yes
- if test "$ac_cv_shell_true_works" = yes; then
+[AC_CACHE_CHECK([whether true(1) works], [my_cv_shell_true_works],
+ [my_cv_shell_true_works=no
+ (true) 2>/dev/null && my_cv_shell_true_works=yes
+ if test "$my_cv_shell_true_works" = yes; then
AC_DEFINE([TRUE_WORKS], [1],
[Define if `true(1)' works properly.])
fi])
@@ -8612,10 +8612,10 @@
@example
@group
AC_DEFUN([AC_SHELL_TRUE],
-[AC_CACHE_CHECK([whether true(1) works], [ac_cv_shell_true_works],
- [ac_cv_shell_true_works=no
- (true) 2>/dev/null && ac_cv_shell_true_works=yes])
- if test "$ac_cv_shell_true_works" = yes; then
+[AC_CACHE_CHECK([whether true(1) works], [my_cv_shell_true_works],
+ [my_cv_shell_true_works=no
+ (true) 2>/dev/null && my_cv_shell_true_works=yes])
+ if test "$my_cv_shell_true_works" = yes; then
AC_DEFINE([TRUE_WORKS], [1],
[Define if `true(1)' works properly.])
fi
